Category: Military applications for renewable energy


Outside Online magazine has a fascinating article on renewable energy and front-line fighting with the United States Marines.

Back in 2003 during the second Iraq war in 2003, General James Mattis commanded the 1st Marine Division during their initial drive into Baghdad, and found his division repeatedly outpacing their own fuel resupply.

They were required to reduce speed to match pace with the much slower fuel resources if they wished to remain fully fueled during the trip. In General Mattis’ post-combat report to Congress, he asked the US Department of Defense to “unleash us from the tether of fuel.” It hasn’t exactly happened yet.

This story is not just a report on the second Iraq war. It features detailed accounts of US Marines India Company, 3rd Battalion, 5th Regiment as they transition to renewable energy sources for power and clean water while they continue to fight.  

Colonel Bob Charette, Head of the Expeditionary Energy Office, is quoted many times in the article. His words are refreshing, especially given the typical gridlock and red tape, debates and watered-down answers we’ve come to expect from Washington. 

“Our dependence on power generation puts us directly at risk,” Charette said. “To the Marine Corps, it isn’t  about money or global warming. It’s about saving lives.”

The efforts to make the Marines more combat effective using renewable energy are quickly gaining ground because of what the story calls, “the Corps’s relentless, non-ideological pragmatism.” 

Charette again: “We’re going to change the way we think. In the Marine Corps, behavior change is easy.”

This time it’s Washington DC who is challenged to keep pace.

This story is worth the read!

On Saturday, Aug 27, 2011, Britain’s The Telegraph published, ”Military Radar deal paves way for more wind farms across Britain“. The story is not about wind energy-powered radar systems or a friendly collaboration between UK military and renewable energy companies. It is about wind technology companies eliminating Ministry of Defence opposition to new wind farms along Britain’s coastline by paying for military upgrades.

Large-scale UK wind farm development has been on hold because of national security concerns. It has been publicized that Britain’s current early warning radar system for detection of enemy missiles and aircraft is susceptible to false readings from a wind turbine’s spinning blades, which are similar in size to a passenger jet wing. Both civil and military air traffic controllers struggle to distinguish between aircraft and wind turbines.

The solution? North British Windpower, along with other wind energy companies, are purchasing new mobile radar systems from US contractor Lockheed Martin at about £20 million each to upgrade Britain’s early warning system. These new systems can detect the difference between stationary and mobile turbine activity. They also open up UK and Scottish Borders to wind farm development. Offshore wind farms are also planned within the North Sea.

If all objections are overcome, the memorandum of understanding between the Department of Energy and Climate Change and the Ministry of Defence has potential to create about 17.5 gigawatts of wind energy offshore (about 6,000 turbines), plus ten gigawatts of wind energy inland (4,500 turbines).

The decision to pay for military upgrades has not silenced all wind farm opponents. It is claimed that the new turbines (typically 400ft high) will destroy pristine countryside and coastline, and increase electricity bills by tens of billions of pounds. Estimates of generated income for the developers, according to Dr. John Constable, director of the Renewable Energy Foundation, “is a sum nearly five times the annual cost of the entire Ministry of Defence: Army, Navy and RAF combined.”

Mark Rowley, who heads up the Say No to Fallago campaign, said even if a small percentage of the plan is implemented, we would see a wall of, “400 foot turbines stretched across some of the finest landscapes in Scotland.”

Are all parties benefiting from this deal in the long run? For those in opposition, is this the price of progress?

Thanks to Claude Vinet for first tweeting a link to the article, and thanks to our growing following on Twitter!

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.